I installed Digipan and brought my TS940SAT upstairs to my Computer. Jeeze that is one heavy rig! Then I put a hunk of wire into the coax socket. It was about 20 feet thrown around the room. I CAN decode some PSK31, but I have about an S8 noise level. Still surprised it worked at all and I was just testing with a Mic on the 940's speaker. I believe the noise is from all the stuff in the house as it only goes down a few S units with the computer off. My guess is all the CAT 5!

So, I tried installing JT65HF! WOW, even with all that noise I get so many stations from all over on 15M...and 20M, so now I finally get to my question...

Can I test JT65HF using 2 Mics? I mean I know I can get a decode with a mic over the speaker, but can I tell it to answer a CQ and with my MC50 held to the Computer speaker complete a QSO? I guess I have about 14 seconds to press send on the Mic's PTT?

I know RF will be in the room, but I will just run 15-20 watts or so. I guess SWR would not even matter at that power level, or should I just hold off until I put up my R5 again?

Thanks all...just trying to get on again. I still have all the "stuff" for 2KW, but I have not put antenna(s) up yet and have no more desire to run high power!

It should work for JT65 -- just get the "mic gain" set correctly, so you don't splatter. JT65 (I think) uses one tone at a time, so you don't have to worry about IMD.

But holding the mics steady for the length of a JT65 QSO -- let us know how it works out.

It sounds like your antenna (a length of wire) has no "ground side" to work against. In your shoes, I'd wait till I have a real antenna (_any_ real antenna!) before transmitting.

Charles

Well, I understand. Perhaps I can make a quick 15M dipole and support it over a few tree limbs. I can keep both mic's stable, so that would be good. I think I prefer PSK31 if the noise level improves as I hope as JT65 is too canned a process. I was a good ragchewer on ssb (and AM) and hate the "5/9" after a 20 second DX contact. I admit falling into that before we moved from CA to OR!

Can I test JT65HF using 2 Mics? I mean I know I can get a decode with a mic over the speaker, but can I tell it to answer a CQ and with my MC50 held to the Computer speaker complete a QSO? I guess I have about 14 seconds to press send on the Mic's PTT?

Not sure what you are referring to about 14 seconds? I suspect it was the dead time at the end of the one period (ODD or EVEN) before the other TX period begins. If so, it isn't 14 seconds but rather 12 seconds if your clock is spot on. The first period stops TX at :48 seconds and the next one starts TX at :00 with the first tone starting at :01 time. Of course listening to the bands, you'd think there was no spec laying out how the mode works. I hear people firing up at all odd times in the ODD/EVEN cycle. It's a wonder they work anybody as far off as they are on their timing.

I guess you could do the 2 mic trick but it sure seems like a lot of work when building a simple interface is an easy weekend event and you'll be able to use it on many other modes than just JT65-HF and it would be a heck of a lot easier to operate than trying to hold a mic keyed for a long while without moving it.

Either way, good luck. Hope it works out for you. I really like JT65-HF and have had some QSOs on signals I didn't even know were there.

Yes, 12 seconds. I only asked about 2 mic's as a trial. Not sure just what I will need for an interface for my TS940SAT. Will I need isolation transformer(s)?

I would prefer PSK31 as I am not too sure I like the call, sig rpt and 73 format of JT65. I guess it is the same as the LEO's on 2. I worked a few stations with a homebrew 2/440 antenna and thought "well, that worked...so what". I am afraid I would feel that way about JT65HF. Great for awards though. I will, of course, try it out.

It should work for JT65 -- just get the "mic gain" set correctly, so you don't splatter. JT65 (I think) uses one tone at a time, so you don't have to worry about IMD.

But holding the mics steady for the length of a JT65 QSO -- let us know how it works out.

It sounds like your antenna (a length of wire) has no "ground side" to work against. In your shoes, I'd wait till I have a real antenna (_any_ real antenna!) before transmitting.

Charles

Well, I will have to wait...darn it! I did try to tune with the TS940SAT's tuner but it would not get a match. I will have to put my R5 up, lashed to a deck post and run coax to it just to be sure I get rid of the noise from inside the house. At least I hope that is the source. At any rate, I can not believe what I can decode on 15 and 10 on JT65HF! That is why I tried the XMT just to see if I got anywhere. I guess I am better off that it did not work. I may even try a quick dopole, but would be better off with the R5 back up!

Yes, 12 seconds. I only asked about 2 mic's as a trial. Not sure just what I will need for an interface for my TS940SAT. Will I need isolation transformer(s)?

I would prefer PSK31 as I am not too sure I like the call, sig rpt and 73 format of JT65. I guess it is the same as the LEO's on 2. I worked a few stations with a homebrew 2/440 antenna and thought "well, that worked...so what". I am afraid I would feel that way about JT65HF. Great for awards though. I will, of course, try it out.

Isolation is not an absolute for any rig so long as there is no issues that will require it. Usually your miles ahead to put it in and be safe than to have to pull it all out and start over. I have home brewed several interfaces and used xfmr isolation in all of them as well as my latest change is to use optoisolators for the keying circuits for CW, PTT and FSK rather than just transistors.

The nice thing about using xfmr isolation is there is no chance of a ground loop to introduce hum and noise. There are those who will argue that it is not needed and basically that is true but I would go ahead and add them if your are building your own interface.

One thing to remember about the TS-940S is if you use the FSK port for RTTY, the signal is inverted at the radio RTTY port and needs to be reverse in the HARDWARE for TX only (not the software) unless you are only going to use a single software package to do digital. You cannot reverse it in the MMTTY software because it wants to reverse both TX and RX and only the TX needs to be reversed in this case. I had a time figuring out this but found this to be the case. Newer rigs have menu options to reverse it on the fly but not in the 940.

Well, I believe I will not use FSK, so I can just use SSB mode for the PSK31 and JT65. I am looking at the Signalink USB as it is easy. Also, how much more is it, by the time you get the connectors and xfmr's, etc? One reason I wanted to try the 2 mic "air" interface is to see how soon those modes get old. I think PSK31 will be OK, but I think JT65HF is just an award mode!

But holding the mics steady for the length of a JT65 QSO -- let us know how it works out.

It sounds like your antenna (a length of wire) has no "ground side" to work against. In your shoes, I'd wait till I have a real antenna (_any_ real antenna!) before transmitting.

Charles

Well, I found an old 10m dipole that I had made years ago. It now seems to be cut for about 32MHZ! Anyway, I put it in the room as an L and the 940SAT tuner liked it. So, I tried a JT65 CQ. I had the MC85 MIC sitting on the RIG and the goose neck bent over to be near the Computer speaker. A true "Air Interface". I got an answer to my first JT65 CQ! Of coarse I will try a few more, and can not wait to put my R5 up!

I started PSK31 with an "air interface". It only took about a half-dozen QSO's before I ordered a real interface -- once I knew it worked, I wanted it to work _right_.

Charles

YES, I agree. I got an answer to a CQ from Japan, but our dogs started barking and the "air interface" made it impossible to continue. The rig and computer will move downstairs, but I agree and was thinking of the Signalink USB. Is that what you got?

Also, I logged the QSO with JT65-HF and uploaded it to eQSL. Do I need to delete my log file when I work others? I wonder if I don't what eQSL does to dups.

I use a Buxcomm Rascal -- about 10 years old. It needs an RS-232 connection for TX/RX switching, and (with any modern computer) that means you'll have to get a USB-to-RS232 adapter. And that has problems of its own.

There may be a newer "Rascal USB", but I haven't tried it or heard any comments.

The SignaLink USB is probably the easiest interface to get up and running right. Since it has a built-in soundcard, you don't have to worry about Windows changing TX or RX levels. And it does its own RX/TX switching, using VOX. It gets consistent good reviews here, and elsewhere. f you have the cash, it's a good choice.

If the TS-940SAT has a 6-pin "DATA" jack for packet operation (check the manual), you can almost certainly use the standard SignaLink 6-pin cable.

I use a Buxcomm Rascal -- about 10 years old. It needs an RS-232 connection for TX/RX switching, and (with any modern computer) that means you'll have to get a USB-to-RS232 adapter. And that has problems of its own.

There may be a newer "Rascal USB", but I haven't tried it or heard any comments.

The SignaLink USB is probably the easiest interface to get up and running right. Since it has a built-in soundcard, you don't have to worry about Windows changing TX or RX levels. And it does its own RX/TX switching, using VOX. It gets consistent good reviews here, and elsewhere. f you have the cash, it's a good choice.

If the TS-940SAT has a 6-pin "DATA" jack for packet operation (check the manual), you can almost certainly use the standard SignaLink 6-pin cable.

Charles

Well, it has a 6 pin and a 13 pin. I believe the 13 pin is the one to use.

Copyright 2000-2017 eHam.net, LLC
eHam.net is a community web site for amateur (ham) radio operators around the world.
Contact the site with comments or questions.
WEBMASTER@EHAM.NETSite Privacy Statement